Let b,n>1 be integers. Suppose that for each k>1 there exists an integer ak such that b−ank is divisible by k. Prove that b=An for some integer A. Author: Dan Brown, Canada
Problem
Source: IMO Shortlist 2007, N2, Ukrainian TST 2008 Problem 10
Tags: modular arithmetic, number theory, Divisibility, IMO Shortlist, Hi
13.07.2008 16:55
let k=b2: b2|b−ank⇒ank=b(bx+1) but gcd(b,bx+1)=1 therefore b=An for some integer A.
05.10.2008 04:10
orl wrote: Let b,n>1 be integers. Suppose that for each k>1 there exists an integer ak such that b−ank is divisible by k. Prove that b=An for some integer A. Author: unknown author, Canada
05.10.2008 04:32
It may be interesting to know that if 8 \nmid n, then it suffices to consider primes k only. More generally (more or less the Grunwald-Wang-theorem): Let n,b be a integers, n > 0. If for all primes p there is an a_p such that p|b - a_p^n, then the following holds: a) If 8 \nmid n, then b = a^n for some integer a. b) If 8|n then b = a^{\frac n2} for some integer a. This was posted and partially solved before. For those knowing algebraic number theory, this can be generalised even more (those don't knowing algebraic number theory, please stop here ): Let K be a number field, b \in K, n = m \cdot 2^s > 0 an integer ( m odd). If b is a n-th power in all but finitely many completions K_v (where v runs through the primes of K), then: a) If K[\zeta_{2^s}]|K is cyclic, then b = a^n for some a \in K. b) Otherwise, b = a^{\frac n2} for some a \in K. Proving this is some work in (pre)global class field theory (the main step being to show that if L|K has all but finitely many primes totally split, then K = L).
12.02.2009 17:10
Note that a) indeed requires 8\nmid n: Let b = 16, n = 8. We have x^8 - 16 = (x^2 - 2)(x^2 + 2)(x^2 - 2x + 2)(x^2 + 2x + 2). Of course one of the numbers - 1, - 2,2 is a quadratic residue \mod p. It means that for every prime p one of the equations (x + 1)^2 + 1 = 0, x^2 + 2 = 0, x^2 - 2 = 0 has a solution \mod p and so does x^8 - 16 = 0. And 16\neq A^8. [Moderator edit: See also http://www.mathlinks.ro/viewtopic.php?t=4874 for this counterexample.]
12.02.2009 17:20
I also didn't see it at first, but p is not necessarily prime. Using this, it gets really easy (using valuations). But you will have a lot of fun to show that if we require that 8 \nmid n, then we need only to look at primes p.
09.03.2011 04:31
Solution Assume that there is no A such that b=A^n. Then there must exist a prime number p such that, if p^a \| b, then n \not | a. Assume now that mn < a < (m+1)n for some m \in \mathbb{N}. Taking k=p^{(m+1)n} yields that b \equiv a_{k}^n \pmod{p^{(m+1)n}} Which implies that p^{a} |a_{k}^n and, since a_{k}^n is a perfect nth power, that p^{(m+1)n} | a_{k}^n. Hence b \equiv 0 \pmod{p^{(m+1)n}} and n|a which is a contradiction. \blacksquare
07.11.2016 18:04
Does anyone have a solition with looking at a prime divisor of n?
25.11.2016 16:20
ali666 wrote: let k=b^2: b^2|b-a^n_k \Rightarrow a^n_k=b(bx+1) but gcd(b , bx+1)=1 therefore b=A^n for some integer A. Can you explain more detailed?
14.10.2017 17:33
A different Solution write b as b=B^n \times j where gcd(B,j)=1 now if j=1 then we are done. Suppose j is not equal to 1 then consider a prime which divides j and consider k=p^n now since p|j then p|a_k this implies p^n|{a_k}^n implies p^n|j but then it follows that p^{n}|B by definition of B. So this a contradiction and hence we are infact done.
03.12.2017 11:16
hehe my solution if exist p: Vp(b)=r.n+s ( 0<s<n) then choose k=p^(r(n+1)) then Vp(ak) > r then Vp(ak) >= r+1 then Vp(b-ak^n) = rn+s < r(n+1)
28.12.2017 09:48
in this problem b and n are not fixed right? they can vary, just like k?
21.02.2018 04:38
Let b=p^{an+c}l where p is prime and (p,l)=1 and 1\leq c\leq n-1. Let k=p^{an+n}, k|b-a_k^n,=>v_p(k)\leq v_p(b-a_k^n)<=>an+n\leq v_p(b-a_k^n)=min\left\{v_p(b),v_p(a_k^n)\right\}\leq an+c . Which is plainly a contradiction, thus b=m^n
18.03.2018 07:57
vjdjmathaddict wrote: A different Solution write b as b=B^n \times j where gcd(B,j)=1 now if j=1 then we are done. Suppose j is not equal to 1 then consider a prime which divides j and consider k=p^n now since p|j then p|a_k this implies p^n|{a_k}^n implies p^n|j but then it follows that p^{n}|B by definition of B. So this a contradiction and hence we are infact done. Wrong: If you take B to be the max n-th power that divides b, then not necessarily GCD(B,j)=1, but if you take by construction that GCD(B,j) , B and j are clearly unique, but not necessarily all n-th power that divides b go to B. Take for instanceb=(2^n)*(3^(n+1)), then B=2^n and j=3^(n+1) are the only air (B,j), but 3^n divides j, and therefore no contradiction
26.05.2018 10:49
Nice problem. Hope, my solution is not the same as anyone else's \rightarrow. Suppose there exists a prime \text{p} such that b = p^{\alpha n + e_0}x , 1 \le e_0 < n. Where, \text{gcd} ( x,p)=1 and \text{v}_p(b) is not congruent to 0 \pmod{n}. Now, let k= p^{n (\alpha +1)}. Now, \text{v}_p(b-a_k^n) must be greater than or equal to \text{v}_p(k) = n(\alpha + 1). \blacksquare Case 1.: \text{v}_p(a_k) \le \alpha. \implies \text{v}_p(b) \ge \text{v}_p(a_k^n) \implies \text{v}_p(b-a_k^n) =\text{v}_p(a_k^n) \le \alpha contradiction. \blacksquare Case 2.: \text{v}_p(a_k) \ge \alpha +1. \implies \text{v}_p(a_k^n) \ge \text{v}_p(b) \implies \text{v}_p(b-a_k^n) = \text{v}_p(b) < n(\alpha + 1) contradiction. Henceforth, we conclude that e_0 \equiv 0 \pmod {n} \implies b=m^n.
29.07.2018 13:52
Take p=prime,p\mid b,v_p(b)=\alpha,b=p^{\alpha}c gcd(p,c)=1.Take k=p^{\alpha+1} p^{\alpha+1}\mid p^{\alpha}c-a^n,take v_p(a)=\beta so \alpha\le\beta n.If \beta n>\alpha then p\mid c false! We must have \alpha=\beta n,but this is true for any prime that divides n so b=A^n for some A
05.10.2019 19:16
b = p^{nq + r}b_1 where (b_1,p) = 1. If r \neq 0, choose p^{nq +r + 1} | p^{nq + r}b_1 - a^n \implies p^{nq + r} | p^{nq +r}b_1 - a^n but this means p^{nq + r + 1} | a^n and therefore p^{nq + r + 1} | b, a contradiction.
30.10.2019 14:57
28.12.2019 01:43
ShaftDraftKiller wrote:
Well, you exactly showed if p, prime, divides b, so p^n also divides b. But, that doesn't mean b=A^n for some A. Maybe, you can do something like that, but with v_p(b). Greetings ! ! !
26.03.2020 08:32
Well, it looks like I solved a special case of this problem in this thread, so I might as well make the necessary changes and port it over Throughout this proof, let \nu_p(m) denote the largest integer t such that p^t divides m. Suppose, by way of contradiction, that b is not a perfect n^{\text{th}} power. Pick a prime divisor p of b for which \ell := \nu_p(b) is not divisible by n; such a p must exist. Now choose k = p^{\ell + 1}, and suppose there exists n such that b\equiv a_k^n\pmod{p^{\ell + 1}}. Certainly, b\equiv a_k^n\pmod p, so a_k^n is divisible by p; in turn, a_k is divisible by p. But now by assumption \nu_p(b) = \ell cannot equal \nu_p(a_k^n) = n\nu_p(a_k) (because then it'd be divisible by n!), so \nu_p(a_k^n - b) = \min(\nu_p(a_k^n),\nu_p(b)) \leq \nu_p(b) = \ell. Hence a_k^n - b is not divisible by p^{\ell + 1}, which is a contradiction. Since a_k was arbitrary, we deduce that b is not an n^{\text{th}} power modulo p^{\ell + 1}, which contradicts the problem statement. Thus our assumption was wrong and b=A^n for some A.
14.12.2022 19:06
Suppose not. Then there exists p such that n\nmid \nu_p(b). Let \nu_p(b) = t. Setting k = p^{t+1} gives \nu_p(c^n) = n\nu_p(c) = \nu_p(b) for some c, which is impossible.
14.04.2023 21:54
Take k=b^2 so that a_{b^2}^n \equiv b \pmod{b^2}. Then, a_{b^2}^n = b(bj+1) for some nonnegative integer j, but (b, bj+1)=1, so b=A^n for some integer A, as desired.
26.04.2023 19:46
The main idea of the problem is the assertion k=b^2. Then for every prime p dividing b, we clearly need n\mid\nu_p(b). \blacksquare
20.07.2023 11:21
k=b^2 implies that a_{b^2}^n = b(1-cb) for some c. However, for all p \mid b, \nu_p(b(1-cb)) = \nu_p(b) and we're done since n \mid \nu_p(b(1-cb)). \square
15.08.2023 00:05
Another one liner? The assertion k=b^2\implies a_{b^2}^n = b(1-kb)\implies n\cdot v_pa_{b^2}=v_pa_{b^2}^n=v_p(b(1-kb))=v_pb\forall p\mid b\implies n\mid v_pb,which is just the problem rephrased since each exponent of a prime in b must be a multiple of n. \blacksquare
23.02.2024 19:16
Consider a k such that for every prime p dividing b, \nu_p(k)>\nu_p(b) (here k=b^2 works easily), note that k\mid b-a_k^n, if \nu_p(b)=n\nu_p(a_k) we are done, so assume the contrary then \nu_p\left(b-a_k^n\right)=\min\{\nu_p(b),n\nu_p(a_k)\}>\nu_p(k)Which is impossible as \nu_p(b)<\nu_p(k)
29.04.2024 12:52
05.06.2024 00:54
Suppose b = \prod p_i^{e_i}, and construct k = \prod p_i^{f_i} such that f_i > e_i for all i. We must have a^n \equiv \prod p_i^{e_i} \pmod k, so for all i, we have v_{p_i}(a^n) = v_{p_i}(b) = e_i \implies n \mid e_i, which gives the desired. \blacksquare
11.07.2024 05:36
For any p \mid b, we want to prove that n \mid \nu_p(b). For any p \mid b, consider k st \nu_p(k) > \nu_p(b), then \nu_p(b-a_k^n) > \nu_p(b). If \nu_p(b) \neq \nu_p(a_k^n) we have \min\{\nu_p(b), \nu_p(a_k^n)\}>\nu_p(b) which is impossible. Thus \nu_p(b)=n \nu_p(a_k) \implies n \mid \nu_p(b).
05.08.2024 17:19
I denote the number mapped to k here by r for the sake of fast writing : we have : b-r^{n}=xk then r^{n}=b(1-\frac{xk}{b}) Then it's enough to take a good k to make gcd(b,1-\frac{xk}{b})=1 Take k=b^{t} where t is a positive integer greater than 2
05.08.2024 17:54
Posting for storage. Suppose there exists p\mid b with \nu_p(b) = a such that (t-1)n < a < tn. Take k = p^{tn} to get that p^{tn} \mid b - a_{k}^{n} so clearly p\mid a_{k}. Let \nu_p(a_{k})=b if b < t-1 we have that \nu_p(b-a_{k}) \le (t-1)n - false. If b \ge t we have that \nu_p(b-a_{k}) = a \le tn - false. So there isnt such prime and hence b = A^{n}.
14.08.2024 12:33
Nice problem, didn't see the really slick choice for k but this also works. Consider a prime p \mid b such that \nu_p(b) = nq+r for positive integers q and 0<r<n. Now, we have 3 possible cases. Then, by the given hypothesis, there exists a positive integer a such that p^{nq+r+1} \mid b-a^n. We have then three possible cases. Case 1 : \nu_p(b) > \nu_p(a^n). Then, \nu_p(b-a^n)=\nu_p(a^n)=n\nu_p(a). Since \nu_p(a^n) < \nu_p(b)=nq+r < n(q+1), so \nu_p(a^n) \le nq < nq+r+1, so the desired divisibility does not hold. Case 2 : \nu_p(b) < \nu_p(a^n). Then, \nu_p(b-a^n)=\nu_p(b) = nq+r < nq+r+1, so again the desired divisibility cannot hold. Case 3 : \nu_p(b)=\nu_p(a^n)=n\nu_p(a) which is a multiple of n. Thus, n\mid \nu_p(b)=nq+r, which is a clear contradiction based on our choice of r. Thus, there cannot exist such a prime p implying that for all primes p\mid b, n\mid \nu_p(b), i.e b is a perfect n^{\text{th}} power and thus can be written in the form b=A^n for some positive integer A.
20.10.2024 02:18
We prove that each individual prime factor of b has exponent divisible by n. Assume some prime factor p doesn't, let it have exponent xn + c for c < n, then taking k = p^{n(c + 1)} finishes, as all nth power residues modulo that value of k should \nu_p divisible by n.
10.12.2024 09:44
Nice
15.02.2025 08:55
OG!